As regards the “Victorian ANE view”, you have to remember a couple of things. First, there’s a “founder effect”, in that all these texts (apart from Genesis, whose interpretation had a long tradition) were newly discovered, so the first “modern” understanding came from those with nineteenth century assumptions, and coloured everything afterwards.
Second, those Victorian assumptions included a Copernican cosmology, which saw the earth as a lump in an effectively infinite space full of immaterial “aether”. Mediaeval people, by contrast, saw the earth as a lump in a finite universe maybe 90 million miles across, the outer surface being God’s (immaterial) heaven, with nothing beyond. They’d have never read a phrase like “the deep” or “Tiamat the salt water from which everything came” and thought of an infinite ocean, like a Newtonian Universe but full of water. But the Victorians did.
Similarly, once the earth has to be floating in such a boundless deep, it’s got to have a physical shape (because Victorians were very mechanically minded - a world with undefined boundaries, or only describing Mesopotamia or Egypt, wasn’t going to work for them), even though you also assume that “the ancients” believed in a flat earth - in fact you even believe mediaeval people believed in a flat earth.
So you have to round it off at the bottom, include a few reservoirs and, in the Bible’s case, a kind of cave called “Sheol”, all with your infinite ocean underneath. Then you must cover it at the top to stop the water getting in with a dome… and so on. You end up with what is basically a Copernican universe in antique costume.
Turn that into a lithograph, and you’ve set the standard model for “the” ancient universe until someone like Lambert looks at the texts more closely, with more cultural knowledge, and starts from scratch, with entirely different conclusions.